Re: List traffic

Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> wrote:

> If they're interested in performance topics and they're not
> subscribed to -general then they're missing *most* of what they're
> interested in which doesn't take place on -performance.

Well, I for one can't currently suck the end of the fire hose which
is -general, and would be less able to do so should other lists be
folded into it. So I lurk on -bugs, -performance, -admin, and
others -- not to glean information so much as to attempt to respond
in areas where I feel I might be able to be helpful and, with a bit
of luck, take some of the burden off of those who do the most to
help people on these lists. Combining lists will only make it
harder for me to attempt to assist in this way.

> And most of what's on -performance ends up being non-performance
> related questions anyways.

I don't believe you. Scanning this:

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2010-05/index.php

I see a few non-performance questions, but they're clearly a small
fraction of the traffic.

> I think what I'm getting at is that we shouldn't have any lists
> for traffic which could reasonably happen on -general.

I think that's exactly backwards -- we shouldn't have any traffic on
-general for issues which could reasonably happen in another list.
You can always configure your email to combine lists into a common
folder upon receipt.

-Kevin